Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 JUNE 2020

It's Implied! Tacit Contractual Terms

It is commonly believed that when entering into a contractual arrangement that the resulting relationship is to be governed by the terms as it appears in the relevant contract and those terms only. This is not entirely incorrect.

South AfricaCorporate/Commercial Law

It is commonly believed that when entering into a contractual arrangement that the resulting relationship is to be governed by the terms as it appears in the relevant contract and those terms only. This is not entirely incorrect. With both written and oral contracts (with certain exceptions), considered valid by our courts; this appears to be a safe assumption to make.

However, what are implied or tacit terms to a contract and how do they operate?

In the  case of Alfred McAlpine and Son (Pty) Ltd v Transvaal Provincial Administration 1974 (3) SA 506 (A), a tacit term was referred to as an unexpressed provision of a contract, inferred by the court from the express terms of the contract and the surrounding circumstances. The aforementioned case further referred to the common law test for determining whether a tacit term exists. Referred to as the 'officious bystander' test. The test poses the question as to whether the tacit term applies, to an "officious

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from